/tg/Station 13

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=33920

its not a note, its a new core memory that everyone will cherish forever.

appeals like these exist only to flex a cool note, prove me wrong

Unironically though im pretty sure the admin noted him because how simple the bug was and how easy it was to explain in hindsight.

Imagine being an admin and then another admin infinitely explodes and kills a ton of people and they tell you exactly how it happened as if they knew it was going to happen.


Kraven clearly didnt know this was going to happen because most stuff like this have failsafes in place, he just naturally wore rd modsuit because hes rd and used the extract because revs, the extract should have consumed itself while kraven`s body is preserved, or just gib his body through anti gib clothing because the explosion was from within his inventory, anyone could expect either of these two to occur.

blackdav123 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 4:51 am appeals like these exist only to flex a cool note, prove me wrong

Yea that was absolutely hilarious, Conrad shouldn't have noted it but I'm glad he did because now its immortalized on the forums forever

Kraven shaking the station for upwards of five minutes was, in fact, very entertaining.

I had to note Trexter. It's not right for an admin to have a kill count higher than a player in such a short period of time.

i don’t think there has to be a record of a player accidentally triggering a bug. especially something like this where it’s a completely normal thing (deadman oil extract, straight out of the xenobio wiki) simply failing to work due to shitcode

maybe if there were doubt as to whether it was done intentionally or not, but that wouldn’t apply here

The issue report.

I don't believe trexter discovered the bug beforehand then got himself kill just to kamikaze the station.

I think the note is justified. It is just here incase they do it again, and if so, admins can be like "yeah, you have done this before", and bean 'em.

I AM SO MAD I MISSED THIS

quick addition-- as an admin Kraven, you should completely understand why you were noted

notes serve as a record, not a punishment

I am crying laughing at the decription of what happened I wish I saw it ahahahahaah

We need to make this a progtot final objective if you have die a glorious death. Just turn yourself into an infinite explosion singulo.


Ahahahaha
EDIT: REMOVING THE VIDEO LINK I EDITED IN BECAUSE THERE WAS A POST THAT WAS MADE THAT HAS THE LINK

just saw a video of an example of said chain explosion

it is so beautiful

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqZ4uip ... nel=tattle

Kendrickorium wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 11:52 am quick addition-- as an admin Kraven, you should completely understand why you were noted

notes serve as a record, not a punishment

To be honest, I'm happy with the appeal serving as a record. Considering how Trexter was also helpful about it by submitting a bug report and was totally chill in the ahelp, I was happy to remove the note. I would have done that for any player under the same circumstances.

The point of notes is precisely that: to inform future admins.

Ban kraven, they dont do funny antagonists.

conrad wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 12:02 pm The point of notes is precisely that: to inform future admins.

i feel like you don't have to inform future admins that the RD wore a bombsuit and then held a stabilized oil extract on a rev round

notes should only be for wrongdoing or something that was at least potential wrongdoing

sinfulbliss wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 12:39 pm

conrad wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 12:02 pm The point of notes is precisely that: to inform future admins.

at least potential wrongdoing

i'd say accidental chain bombing of station for god knows how long(hilarious) could be construed as potential wrongdoing

Kendrickorium wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 1:25 pm

sinfulbliss wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 12:39 pm

conrad wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 12:02 pm The point of notes is precisely that: to inform future admins.

at least potential wrongdoing

i'd say accidental chain bombing of station for god knows how long(hilarious) could be construed as potential wrongdoing

I disagree. If you don’t know the inns and outs of xenobiology this may not be understood properly:

A stabilized oil extract causes the user to explode upon death. This is a simple game mechanic, pasted on the wiki.

The RD hardsuit makes sense to wear with an extract like this, because it prevents your body from being gibbed due to bombs. A very standard well-known game mechanic.

These are two completely innocuous, normal things in the game. It isn’t like some concoction of obscure features combined in the perfect way to create a bug - in that case, even if accidental, it would make sense noting since there’s a chance it was intentional. But in this case it’s beyond a shadow of a doubt simply an error with the code. No malice at all was intended. Notes are punishments and make you get hit harder the next time something similar comes up, so they shouldn’t be applied as some neutral fact-keeping device.

I imagine Conrad agreed with that on some level and that’s why he lifted it.

sinfulbliss wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 12:39 pm i feel like you don't have to inform future admins that the RD wore a bombsuit and then held a stabilized oil extract on a rev round

I didn't, that's not what the note was about. You are welcome to re-read the appeal. You don't get noted, say, for making a maxcap as a non-antag. You get noted if that maxcap goes off and kills a bunch of people. (Potentially banned)

The RD in question, on the round in question, ripped through the station as an explosive piñata of death, wrecked medbay, wrecked departures, and killed at least 15 people (I haven't checked which were heads and which were revs). That enough would be cause to ban someone for at least a month, if they had done it on purpose "to kill revs, man", and permanently if they had a history.

There was no "potential damage", there was a station that lost 1/3 of its body mass. It warrants a note for the case in which the player does it again.

sinfulbliss wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 12:39 pm notes should only be for wrongdoing or something that was at least potential wrongdoing

What Kendrickoriun said. I lifted the note due to the appeals nature and demeanour.

sinfulbliss wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 1:38 pm

Kendrickorium wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 1:25 pm

sinfulbliss wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 12:39 pm

conrad wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 12:02 pm The point of notes is precisely that: to inform future admins.

at least potential wrongdoing

i'd say accidental chain bombing of station for god knows how long(hilarious) could be construed as potential wrongdoing

I disagree. If you don’t know the inns and outs of xenobiology this may not be understood properly:

A stabilized oil extract causes the user to explode upon death. This is a simple game mechanic, pasted on the wiki.

The RD hardsuit makes sense to wear with an extract like this, because it prevents your body from being gibbed due to bombs. A very standard well-known game mechanic.

These are two completely innocuous, normal things in the game. It isn’t like some concoction of obscure features combined in the perfect way to create a bug - in that case, even if accidental, it would make sense noting since there’s a chance it was intentional. But in this case it’s beyond a shadow of a doubt simply an error with the code. No malice at all was intended. Notes are punishments and make you get hit harder the next time something similar comes up, so they shouldn’t be applied as some neutral fact-keeping device.

I imagine Conrad agreed with that on some level and that’s why he lifted it.

I accidentally decapitated lucy cicero one time and got noted for it
it wasnt an accident
i did it on purpose

conrad wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 1:40 pm

sinfulbliss wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 12:39 pm i feel like you don't have to inform future admins that the RD wore a bombsuit and then held a stabilized oil extract on a rev round

The RD in question, on the round in question, ripped through the station as an explosive piñata of death, wrecked medbay, wrecked departures, and killed at least 15 people (I haven't checked which were heads and which were revs). That enough would be cause to ban someone for at least a month, if they had done it on purpose "to kill revs, man", and permanently if they had a history.

The RD 1) wore a bombsuit, and 2) held a death-activated bomb. His corpse tore through the station because of faulty game code. So to put the responsibility on the RD whatsoever would already be a mistake, unless the things he did leading up to this could be presumed to maybe be for the explicit purpose of triggering a bug. But knowing how basic and innocuous these things were, that is a resounding “no.”

conrad wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 1:40 pm There was no "potential damage", there was a station that lost 1/3 of its body mass. It warrants a note for the case in which the player does it again.

Sometimes bad things can happen without necessarily being anybody’s fault. Putting a note on someone’s account saying neutrally that they triggered a bug which killed a bunch of people and bombed the station, implies they are culpable for that, which they absolutely aren’t in this case.

conrad wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 1:40 pm What Kendrickoriun said. I lifted the note due to the appeals nature and demeanour.

It would be more comforting to know the note was lifted because it was understood to not be a noteworthy situation, rather than because he was polite in the ticket. But I’ll take it.

sinfulbliss wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 1:48 pm Sometimes bad things can happen without necessarily being anybody’s fault. Putting a note on someone’s account saying neutrally that they triggered a bug which killed a bunch of people and bombed the station, implies they are culpable for that, which they absolutely aren’t in this case.

Which is why it's a note, not a ban. If they were culpable, they wouldn't be playing the game for a long, long, looooong time. In which case, culpable means purposefully abusing the bug.

sinfulbliss wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 1:48 pm It would be more comforting to know the note was lifted because it was understood to not be a noteworthy situation, rather than because he was polite in the ticket. But I’ll take it.

That's really not the only reason that I lifted the note. It was that (being easy on the ahelps), the fact that he appealed (leaving a record at least somewhere), the fact it was not on purpose, and the fact he did a bug report.

This isn't like a list of requirements. It's just a compilation of things that made lifting the note a no-brainer.

I now have a question for you, sinful. Did you read the appeal? Because I am not explaining anything new here, I am repeating what I already said. I'm gonna stop posting on a peanut about me, but I would ask that you reconsider what notes are for, and what the appeal was about, in such discussions.

Loving our quote war btw, today's being a tough day and this is fun.

What a shitshow. I had hope conrad wouldn't be a shitmin but it turns out he's just as obtuse while adminning as he is here on the forums.

conrad wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 2:20 pm [...]the fact it was not on purpose,[...]

YES. GOOD. WE AGREE... THE SALIENT POINT. /thread

conrad wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 2:20 pm I now have a question for you, sinful. Did you read the appeal? Because I am not explaining anything new here, I am repeating what I already said. I'm gonna stop posting on a peanut about me, but I would ask that you reconsider what notes are for, and what the appeal was about, in such discussions.

I did! I read it a second time after you'd asked me before, just to be sure of things... The second time I read it I noticed that the note didn't actually specifically say what the bug was, although maybe it wasn't known at the time?
The point I'm trying to express but clearly doing a bad job at is... How INNOCUOUS their actions were, and how INSANE and UNPREDICTABLE the results were. If the note mentioned specifically, "Wore a bombsuit and a stabilized oil extract, which had the odd side effect of chain-exploding them upon death, creating mass carnage and several deaths. They claimed this was unintentional and I fully believe this was a freak bug occurrence." It would read COMPLETELY different, IMO.

If an admin reads that, they think "yikes that's funny," nothing else really - at that point you wonder why it's even there. But with the way you worded it, an admin could easily read that and think, "oh man, this Kraven guy really caused a big fuckup didn't he? I'll keep THAT in mind for the future!" which he DIDN'T DESERVE. But you lifted it so this is all a moot point, I just want to express the viewpoint.

Also Ekaterina you're being insane, the note was lifted.

sinfulbliss wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 3:38 pm Also Ekaterina you're being insane, the note was lifted.

Sure, he could be worse, but it should have never been placed to begin with, and he's still defending that it was a good move at the time. On the contrary, it is stupid to the point of being indefensible.

ekaterina wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 3:39 pm

sinfulbliss wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 3:38 pm Also Ekaterina you're being insane, the note was lifted.

Sure, he could be worse, but it should have never been placed to begin with, and he's still defending that it was a good move at the time. On the contrary, it is stupid to the point of being indefensible.

I find this a very disagreeable point. Admins who make notes/bans and then lift them because they have a change of heart, shouldn't be blamed or shit on for landing on the right decision after consideration. All you're doing is encouraging admins to stubbornly defend bad notes/bans lest they be attacked for admitting a mistake was made.

I agree with sinful. Players will never be perfect, admins will never be perfect, ban appeals exist because admins will never be perfect, this is a very reasonable and logical conclusion to an appeal for a note. Placed with good intentions, but upon review not a note that should exist.

sinfulbliss wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 3:49 pm

ekaterina wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 3:39 pm

sinfulbliss wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 3:38 pm Also Ekaterina you're being insane, the note was lifted.

Sure, he could be worse, but it should have never been placed to begin with, and he's still defending that it was a good move at the time. On the contrary, it is stupid to the point of being indefensible.

I find this a very disagreeable point. Admins who make notes/bans and then lift them because they have a change of heart, shouldn't be blamed or shit on for landing on the right decision after consideration. All you're doing is encouraging admins to stubbornly defend bad notes/bans lest they be attacked for admitting a mistake was made.

How can you take my words and distort them so much? I'm criticising him for placing the note to begin with. I'm not criticising him for removing it - on the contrary, I said that it would have been even worse if he hadn't removed it.

ekaterina wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 5:33 pm

sinfulbliss wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 3:49 pm

ekaterina wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 3:39 pm

sinfulbliss wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 3:38 pm Also Ekaterina you're being insane, the note was lifted.

Sure, he could be worse, but it should have never been placed to begin with, and he's still defending that it was a good move at the time. On the contrary, it is stupid to the point of being indefensible.

I find this a very disagreeable point. Admins who make notes/bans and then lift them because they have a change of heart, shouldn't be blamed or shit on for landing on the right decision after consideration. All you're doing is encouraging admins to stubbornly defend bad notes/bans lest they be attacked for admitting a mistake was made.

How can you take my words and distort them so much? I'm criticising him for placing the note to begin with. I'm not criticising him for removing it - on the contrary, I said that it would have been even worse if he hadn't removed it.

Yes. And I’m saying criticizing someone for an action they almost immediately rescinded, is bad.

With repetitive regards,
-SinfulBliss

sinfulbliss wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 5:58 pm Yes. And I’m saying criticizing someone for an action they almost immediately rescinded, is bad.

It might be, if he conceded it was wrong to begin with, but that's not what he said. He acted like it's not needed anymore, while maintaining that it wasn't incredibly dumb when it was placed.

All in all it's a pretty understandable mistake. It's codestuffs, I don't really expect admins TO UNDERSTAND OUR DOMAIN. I dunno how many times I can really say it that admins are going to place some notes and some bans that will need to get lifted, that's just how it is

Armhulen makes a good point. As a certified c*der, I, of course, know EVERYTHING about code (cough cough) but we can't expect every admin to also have this knowledge, and mistakes will indeed be made on account of that.

For conrad's future reference, player notes are not the place to document bugs. Github's "issues" section is.

ekaterina wrote: ↑Wed Apr 26, 2023 3:13 pm What a shitshow. I had hope conrad wouldn't be a shitmin but it turns out he's just as obtuse while adminning as he is here on the forums.

Damn, guess I'm owned. I'm hanging my admin gloves and retiring to Brazil.